The only part of the writer’s job should be writing the story as much as possible. Not the related code. If the writer needs to touch code, he’s not doing his job. And :john_doe is clearly code. That’s what a developer should be doing. This is not a simple name like a writer thinks about it, it has deeper meaning in tech stack. The writer would never write that when writing a story. They’d write “John Doe”.
There’s nothing totally wrong with it, but instead of writing a good story, the writer is now concerned about writing the story and adhering to the language syntax. Is that easy? Yes, absolutely. There’s nothing difficult about it. But it doesn’t mean these concerns are separated. If you look at it this way, yarn spinner has this issue too, but they try to minimize it as much as they can.
Look how the writer can write clear texts and comments here:
The code parts are up to the developer. They both are still working in the very same file, which is not the best. But at least the lines are clearly following a domain. There’s writer’s domain and there’s developer’s domain.
The issue is not that the writer shouldn’t write identifiers. The issue is that the writer is forced into a language-specific syntax and using this project-specific naming. This naming doesn’t reflect the writer’s domain at all so he’d need to adjust. A lot. A writer would call it a “Person” or “Speaker”, maybe “Actor”, but not identifier. The writer would never write the name in snake_case either. So because the writer now also writes code these 2 people write and edit the very same lines.
I think you’re missing my point here. All I’m saying is your writer should not be forced to write code. And if you’re forcing the writer to do that, you are ignoring the difference between writer and developer with the argument “it’s simple, just learn it”. This forces a writer to be a developer. If you don’t care about providing a way for actual writers to write stories but are only concerned with developers, that’s not an issue. But a writer won’t learn the syntax and details of a language to write a story. Especially if everything is named for techies. The learning curve is through the roof for no reason at all.
But instead of writing that, he writes code.
Okay, I was writing my responses step by step, but at this point, I don’t think this is adding anything constructive to the conversation. I’ve read the rest of your response, and it seems like you’re interpreting my comments as a personal attack, which was never my intent. My goal was simply to point out that there’s a difference between what a writer and a developer do. It seems like you strongly disagree, but to take it further - would you say that people like Philip Roth, JK Rowling, Suzanne Collins, or Stephen King would need to learn tools like Elixir, Git, or even JSON to be good at their craft? That seems a bit off-topic and not the point I was making.
It feels like we’re getting caught up in technical jargon, and it’s shifting the focus from the actual idea I wanted to discuss. I’m all for deep technical discussions, but right now, it seems like we’re heading in circles.
That being said, I understand you’re defending your approach, and of course, you can choose how you want to define roles and responsibilities within your project. But I think it’s worth remembering that being a senior developer isn’t just about years of experience or the title - it’s about the approach you take, the maturity, and the way you engage with problems and others.
I’ve shared my perspective, and I’m starting to feel like we’re not getting anywhere productive with this exchange. It’s important to approach disagreements with a mindset of learning and growth, and right now, it feels like we’re missing that.
I’m assuming my role has also been misunderstood, which further complicates things. I would just like to clarify that we’re not in the same position professionally, so maybe the disconnect here stems from that.
For all the time I’m only surprised. I don’t feel attacked or anything like that. It’s like you know … you live in some kind of information bubble and then you find something you didn’t see. Obviously I have tons of questions …
Sounds like a dream … a dream without Platform Engineer offers, a dream without Fullstack Engineer offers where the developer has to:
Work on the backend (first app)
Work on the frontend (sometimes a separate app)
Sometimes even use it’s own CSS design
Take care about HTML (semantic, accessibility, various browsers compatibility, older versions of browsers compatibility and so on …)
Work on the devops
SEO - positioning page in search results
Sometimes people even require security
That’s 1 backend language + HTML, CSS, JavaScript and tons of libraries/frameworks. To the developer who have to survive in such a reality, you say that someone in the team cannot use identifiers because it’s too much? Fine, pay me 10x more than the you pay the content writer and we have a deal. That should look a response for this kind of demand.
I really understand many things, but so far you say that a content writer cannot even “open a door”, because it’s not a part of their work (it sounds like that). Not much people would look seriously and again there is no way to support someone who don’t even want to collaborate at all.
I’m looking and I see everything but plain text. There is honestly more code than text. How is it better?
I see … but in previous reply you said it’s bad to use same file and now you give an example which is exactly opposite of all you said before.
There is a code
Code logic is mixed with text
The only thing that differs text and code is … syntax
So JSON is bad, YAML is bad, Elixir is bad, but this is better? Where exactly you have separated domains, because I see everything mixed. What’s worse you have to write a really powerful engine for such a short example (light effects, flip animations, walking and so on …).
First of all it’s weird to use full name in text. This is ok in ready product i.e. in UI rendered for user, but there are often more things (like: “John Doe - Director of School”). Now please explain how atomic value is worse than a this? There are tons of possible problems … For example characters are not fetched by unique identifiers, but a full name.
The full name does not really need to be unique. If that’s so how the engine is supposed to support it? What if writer just make a mistake? It needs to be done by hand! Everything needs to be verified line by line by a dev, so the dev needs to know and understand entire story! Really where is the writer job here? Giving ideas to story? This is a terrible example in my opinion. How is that even scalable? The only scalable things I see here are dev responsibilities.
The text is in some format. The language is a problem, but custom format is ok? Think that instead of working on the game logic the dev have to implement parser for it or even worse: copy-paste everything! Now since the writer can’t use git and he would send an updated file how the dev is supposed to know changes? Copy-paste each line again? Fine, there are some tools to compare file, but the dev then suddenly gets another responsibility - he have to be a human replacement for a git.
This argument has died since you said that the writer does not have to know any common format (that’s not part of some language) like JSON or YML. As said the writer looks like a stupid and unskilled person. The writer is only able to enter a plain text. Introducing any format that can automate work of the whole team is “extra work” for writer, so it’s bad.
Again, I understand many things, but there are limits. We require from one person to do 99% of project while the other person is just entering plain text. Do you really call it a team? The more I read the more I worry if I shouldn’t report it (speaking half for fun).
Uses a simple syntax to branch texts. It’s like saying:
I am too lazy you say? It’s not true that I’m not doing anything for the whole day! I’m sleeping! If I would not do anything then I would die! Do you want me to be dead?
Again regardless of format if the writer have really a problem with branching a story then I really don’t want to work with such person. Or alternatively … think that there is a job offer for devs to use X framework and you say that you can use Y and they have to deal with it. It’s not a deal when only the one side have benefits here. Again who is in such a position to not only write text and decide what rules there are?
But let’s go with that logic … If I would create a GUI for that would such writer be suddenly able to branch story? Or maybe he would say that:
clicking buttons is not a job for writer - all I have to do is to write text
No, I really don’t - I’m actually have just a strong cultural shock. I’m even seriously jealous! I 100% honestly would like to be in position when I can force such rules and “don’t care” about the rest - again see dev responsibilities in job offers. Again there are always some formats, patterns the team agrees to create and use. In such case how would you see someone that do not want to learn any even simplest pattern? Again I’m not saying learn Elixir - you said that even YML files are too much and that was a cultural shock.
Yes, in short: writer is typing plain text ignoring any formats, collaboration and tools, and the developer have to deal with it. Again not taking it personally as a developer.
Yeah, I’m not sure if we are still talking in context of writing a branched story … Look that in this quote you call book authors. Book is just a plain text and here I agree a book writer should not be responsible for anything else, but again we talk in context … context of branched story.
You said that as a content writer you want to write a story with many branches, right? After that you say that the writer should use only plain text without any other format - fine, let’s take that. How do you create alternative endings and so on? Because if you write a plain text like a book there is not branching. Plain text prevents story branching.
No, now let me give you example. Let’s assume a clean project (without any UX, devops and so on …) - just a backend and frontend. Now 2 people decides to collaborate. One would take the backend code and the other one the frontend code. Now think that suddenly a frontend developer says:
I have created the frontend logic. My job is done. Now you can integrate it with your backend.
So the frontend developer wrote all the code except the one to communicate with backend. Now the backend developer needs to learn the frontend language, learn the app that was created by frontend developer and integrate it with the backend. Do you really call it a collaboration or working in team?
Then go back to the top of this reply and look again at dev responsibilities. Do you really want to add dev more job? So the dev is working for 6-7 people and content creator does not even try to collaborate, because the only ability is to enter a plain text?
The point is my package has to simplify dev work and not to add him more work.
No, I get it. The content writers most probably came from a paper books market and are only able to enter plain text. i can really understand that. The cultural shock is how they survive for decades?
Look at it from the other perspective like mainsteam medias. The TV is about to be forgotten sooner or later. The mainstream medias need a serious upgrade and enter the net market. Look that at this point the decision (which was made decades ago) is exactly is same place where content writes are.
Now, since mainstream medias didn’t made a good conversion they still don’t play a big role in the internet comparing to the content creators (for example on YouTube). However they have used some tricks. For example they are preparing their shows as before and copy-paste it’s content into few text articles. There are clicks, there are ads - mainstream medias are still far away from the best video channels, but they survived.
So … how did the content creators survived? Like after decades they still don’t use git, JSON, YML and any other well known standard as you said. They only enter a plain text. How exactly they are making money? Because online they sell more copies?
From what I heard the publishers always were taking huge % of all money. I guess it doesn’t changed here as well, right? Since the content creators produce plain text, the publisher have to find someone to format plain text, validate language, take costs of the servers and so on … Is it still worth to just write text and not learn new things.
Yes, I’m asking as a developer who is supposed to learn all the time … I just wonder if I’ve “took the wrong job” or something like that …
Again as said for someone who don’t want to be part of the team I can’t do much in the package. Please pay attention that in this case even a standard translation files (.po) are not good. I would need to implement a true AI if I would like to parse a plain text to convert it into a branched story. However in that case why I should even consider looking for a content writer for a plain text that is hard to process? If the only way to handle the text automatically is to use AI then I would prefer AI to be my content creator.
Except docs or other small improvements I plan one new feature called event:
